# The Call of Duty Club



## Vholvek (Sep 25, 2014)

Okay, honestly, I am not into Call of Duty enough to make a club, but everyone else on here had one so yeah. I guess this is just whatever. But I'll start with a question. What was your favorite game (campaign-wise)?


----------



## Momo(th) (Sep 26, 2014)

I'm basically with Yahtzee Croshaw on the COD series.

I did however liked the original Modern Warfare quite a bit.


----------



## Vholvek (Sep 29, 2014)

Zodiark said:


> I did however liked the original Modern Warfare quite a bit.


It was very fun, but there is a lot of argument over the second one being better. The third isn't even on par with the classics.


----------



## Phantom (Oct 9, 2014)

Vholvek said:


> Okay, honestly, I am not into Call of Duty enough to make a club, but everyone else on here had one so yeah. I guess this is just whatever. But I'll start with a question. What was your favorite game (campaign-wise)?


 'everyone else had one'

 So wait, you thought everyone had to run a club? You do realize the absolutely no sense this makes, yeah?



Vholvek said:


> It was very fun, but there is a lot of argument over the second one being better. The third isn't even on par with the classics.


"Classics"

 Since _when_ did we start calling games from 2007 classics? I mean _sure_ it's seven years old, but that was a BIG year for gaming that a lot of games came out and they are hardly classics, Halo 3 for example. I mean, hell, the XBOX 360 still has brand new titles coming out for it. Advanced Warfare comes out next month. 

 As for Call of Duty here at TCoD, not many here are fans. Myself, I've drifted away from it a bit. I used to play it MLG, tournaments and such. Won quite a bit of money for it too. I hate Ghosts, and I hope AW fixes it. The only reason I play Ghosts is because it's what is active with Clan Wars and I can't abandon my clan. Anyone can feel free to play with me either on Black Ops II or Ghosts, see if you can beat me. But honestly I doubt anyone here is really into the game at all. (I know this place far too well)


----------



## kyeugh (Oct 9, 2014)

Phantom said:


> 'everyone else had one'
> 
> So wait, you thought everyone had to run a club? You do realize the absolutely no sense this makes, yeah?


It's an obscure quote from an equally obscure movie.

I don't really like Call of Duty in concept; I've never understood killing things for the sake of killing them.  The zombie-based end is fun, though, if only because I like the Green Run characters so much.


----------



## Phantom (Oct 10, 2014)

Dazel said:


> I don't really like Call of Duty in concept; I've never understood killing things for the sake of killing them.


Sooo, pitting animals against each other in fights until one of them passes out is okay then, right? 

 Because that is Pokémon. 

 Call of Duty isn't just mindless killing. It's a war game with many objective-based games. It's not just running around killing each other randomly. There's domination, where there are three targets and you have to try to hold them for as long as you can. There's capture the flag, pretty obvious. There's search and destroy, where your character only has one life and you must either plant a bomb and destroy or defuse/defend a target.


----------



## kyeugh (Oct 10, 2014)

Phantom said:


> Sooo, pitting animals against each other in fights until one of them passes out is okay then, right?
> 
> Because that is Pokémon.


Yeah, except Pokémon actually has core values to the point that it's cheesy.  And none of those core values include _killing people_.  By the way, Pokémon battle by choice and the point of it isn't to see who's stronger or better, it's a contest of wit and ability.  You may find this article worth a read.



Phantom said:


> Call of Duty isn't just mindless killing. It's a war game with many objective-based games. It's not just running around killing each other randomly. There's domination, where there are three targets and you have to try to hold them for as long as you can. There's capture the flag, pretty obvious. There's search and destroy, where your character only has one life and you must either plant a bomb and destroy or defuse/defend a target.


I understand that it's not just mindless killing, but you're still electing to sit down and play a game whose basis has, throughout each game, revolved mainly around ruthlessly killing your enemies.  The idea of recreationally killing things, whether it's set up in a capture-the-flag fashion or not, is wrong to me.  I'm not going to tell you not to play it.  It's perfectly fine that you enjoy playing a game of that nature, but I do not for valid reasons that I've already expressed, and I would thank you if you did not press onto me the purity of your war game.


----------



## Vipera Magnifica (Oct 10, 2014)

Dazel said:


> I understand that it's not just mindless killing, but you're still electing to sit down and play a game whose basis has, throughout each game, revolved mainly around ruthlessly killing your enemies.  The idea of recreationally killing things, whether it's set up in a capture-the-flag fashion or not, is wrong to me.


I don't suppose you just run around the monsters when you play a Legend of Zelda game.

Call of Duty games probably aren't that bad in their own regard, but they've come to epitomize all the things I dislike about the modern gaming industry. Developers can just squeeze out a jingoistic first-person shooter that provides _zero innovation_ yet fans will buy it like hotcakes. And what's more, these games try to coerce you into buying countless overcharged DLC packs to get the "full game experience." Playing DLC missions that were made after the game was released is one thing, but what Activision does is just plain greedy. Just look at what they've done with Destiny. Before the game was even _released_, they announced an expansion pack that would effectively double the price of the game. Obviously, video games have to make money, but these days developers don't even try to hide the fact that they constantly have their hands in your pockets, and that just insults me as a gamer.

If playing a game where listening to prepubescent kids yell racial expletives into their crappy microphones is the core game experience sounds fun to you, then by all means play it, but it sure ain't my cup o' tea.


----------



## kyeugh (Oct 10, 2014)

Visitor Message said:


> I don't suppose you just run around the monsters when you play a Legend of Zelda game..


Again, it's not the killing things that bothers me.  I can play a game where you kill things, I suppose.  It's the idea of playing a game solely to kill things that I don't like.


----------



## Vholvek (Oct 13, 2014)

Visitor Message said:


> If playing a game where listening to prepubescent kids yell racial expletives into their crappy microphones is the core game experience sounds fun to you, then by all means play it, but it sure ain't my cup o' tea.


This really made me laugh, because I like ticking said kids off. They just do this whiny girl scream, and then people report them for blowing up their mics. But yeah, if there was maybe like a 13+ rule, it'd fix a lot. Plus, I agree with the DLC thing. I pre-ordered Advanced Warfare, and this season pass deal seems like a bit much. I'll probably still buy it, but still.


----------



## kyeugh (Oct 13, 2014)

Vholvek said:


> But yeah, if there was maybe like a 13+ rule, it'd fix a lot.


Um, I'd like to direct you to the Entertainment Software Rating Board.  Technically, anyone under the age of eighteen is forbidden to play Call of Duty, but of course those are only guidelines.  Still, though, in the United States of America, you need to be at least eighteen to purchase an M-rated game, which means most kids that are "blowing up your mic" have permission to do so, for whatever reason.


----------



## Vholvek (Oct 14, 2014)

Dazel said:


> Um, I'd like to direct you to the Entertainment Software Rating Board.  Technically, anyone under the age of eighteen is forbidden to play Call of Duty, but of course those are only guidelines.  Still, though, in the United States of America, you need to be at least eighteen to purchase an M-rated game, which means most kids that are "blowing up your mic" have permission to do so, for whatever reason.


Alright, mister smarty pants. But what if somehow they found out how old the people who were playing were? Or if the cashier saw a mom buying this stuff for 6 year olds maybe they'd say something? I guess I'm not making much sense, but very few people follow those guidelines. They are suggestions, really. But there should be some less strict, yet mandatory, limitations. Such as the 13+ rule.


----------



## Phantom (Oct 17, 2014)

Dazel said:


> Um, I'd like to direct you to the Entertainment Software Rating Board. Technically,* anyone under the age of eighteen is forbidden to play Call of Duty*, but of course those are only guidelines. Still, though, in the United States of America, you need to be at least eighteen to purchase an M-rated game, which means most kids that are "blowing up your mic" have permission to do so, for whatever reason.


Seventeen. You have to be seventeen to buy an M-rated game like the Call of Duty games.

Buy it. 

No where in the ESRB does it say that those under that age are _forbidden_ to play it. Ratings are just guidelines for content. It is completely parental discretion on whether their child plays the game or not. No one is 'forbidden' from playing any game. 

Also the ESRB isn't responsible for online interaction. Not their job. 

Also, if squeakers are blowing up your mic, just mute them. Not that hard.


----------



## Vholvek (Nov 10, 2014)

I just bought Call of Duty Advanced Warfare and I was reading the back, and I found something interesting. It says "Under 13 requires parental consent." Does this mean I can buy it without parental consent (being 13 and all)?


----------



## kyeugh (Nov 10, 2014)

Vholvek said:


> I just bought Call of Duty Advanced Warfare and I was reading the back, and I found something interesting. It says "Under 13 requires parental consent." Does this mean I can buy it without parental consent (being 13 and all)?


I don't think so!  I may be wrong, but I was pretty sure that if it's rated M you have to bring someone who's actually eighteen with you.  Didn't you figure that out when you tried to preorder it the first time...?


----------



## Vholvek (Nov 10, 2014)

Okay, good point. But maybe it means nobody under 13 should play at all? And even 13-16 need parental consent? I'm not sure.


----------

